The exterior surfaces of aircraft are typically complex surfaces designed for efficient aerodynamics. For military aircraft, the exterior surfaces may be further configured for low observability. In some instances, aircraft exterior surfaces may be covered with a coating configured to reduce the aircraft's electronic (e.g., radar) signature. Such coatings are typically applied to the aircraft in predetermined coverage areas and in predetermined thicknesses depending on the particular aspects of the aircraft.
The external surfaces and coatings of the aircraft are subject to harsh environmental conditions that may damage the surfaces and coatings. For example, bird strikes, hail, and accidental damage may cause dents, scratches, tears or other physical damage to the aircraft surfaces and coatings. Many surfaces of aircraft are precisely configured to exacting standards, such that small imperfections or damage may alter the characteristics of the surface. For example, such damage may reduce the aerodynamic efficiency and/or alter the electronic (e.g., radar) signature of the aircraft.
As such, maintenance operations of the aircraft typically involve visually inspecting the exterior surfaces and coatings of the aircraft to check for damage. During such inspections, an operator or maintenance person may walk around the aircraft and visually inspect the surfaces of the aircraft for irregularities. If any irregularities are found, the operator will write down notes describing the location and extent of the damage/irregularity. After the operator has completed his inspection, and written down all of the damage, the operator then transcribes the data into a computer system. This process is typically a manual process that involves the operator entering text into the computer database using a keyboard and mouse. In some systems, the operator may be presented with a generic drop-down computer menu that may allow the operator to select damage options from a predefined list. However, these predefined lists tend to be incomplete, and cumbersome to use. Once the damage has been entered into the computer, it is typically stored in a database. Such database may be accessed at a later date, in order to make a determination of whether damage found by an operator at a later date is new or was pre-existing.
However, because the inspection process is manual, and relies on operator defined descriptions of damage or predefined options in a drop down menu, the process is time consuming and prone to error. For example, different inspectors may describe the same damage in different ways, which may lead to confusion as to whether a particular damaged surface is new or pre-existing. In other instances, an operator may be constrained to the predefined damage types in a drop down menu, which may not adequately describe the damage, thus forcing the operator to incorrectly describe the damage. Additionally, the operator may not have the tools necessary to accurately measure the location and dimensions of the damage, and thus may not be able to provide adequate descriptions of the damage.
In other situations, defects that are perceived by the operator as being too small or insignificant to repair may not be documented because operators may feel such documentation is unnecessary (i.e., not worth the operator's time to document). However, this lack of documentation contravenes the ability to adequately assess the impact of numerous minor defects which may collectively be a significant issue.
In other inspection systems, such as laser theodolite systems, a complex system of tripod mounted lasers is placed around the aircraft. The lasers are capable of highly accurate measurement of surface defects of the aircraft, however such systems are costly and time consuming to set up. Further, difficulties in aligning the lasers can lead to frustration and error when attempting to use such systems.
In most inspection systems, the data gathered by the operator must be transmitted to a central database for collection and storage. However, this situation becomes complicated when dealing with classified data systems. For example, although the data collected by the operator is in many instances unclassified data, the unclassified data must be input into a classified database. Due to strict requirements, typically electronic devices must be considered classified if they are electronically coupled to a classified computer. For example, an initially unclassified USB memory device must be handled as a classified device once it is inserted into a classified computer. This may be referred to as “contamination” of the unclassified device. Such contamination is possible because the USB memory device is capable of transmitting data into the classified system, and also receiving data from the classified system. Thus, due to possible contamination issues, transferring data from an unclassified device to a classified system can be costly. For this reason, many times the unclassified data is manually input (as described above) using a keyboard or the like into the classified system in order to avoid possible “contamination” of an electronic storage device.
Although reference is made above to aircraft, such circumstances may arise with other vehicles, objects, structures or devices that are inspected, for example, automobiles, rail cars, watercraft, buildings, tools and the like.
Accordingly, there is an unmet need for a visual inspection system and secure data transfer system that remedies existing issues.